Strzok Testimony

[atomheartbevo 90571]

2 hours ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

And he didn't get fired over the affair. Just stop trying to make that a thing.

He should have been.  That's a serious issue with blackmail/security clearances.  I saw a couple of people booted out of the Army for adultery, and granted, the military has stricter laws on adultery, but a security clearance played into one of them.

[atomheartbevo 90571]

1 hour ago, Fozzz said:

Jesus fucking Christ

 

 

George Soros.

[Captainant 28421]

23 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

He should have been.  That's a serious issue with blackmail/security clearances.  I saw a couple of people booted out of the Army for adultery, and granted, the military has stricter laws on adultery, but a security clearance played into one of them.

That doesn't matter. He was fired for holding a 1A protected political belief.

[atomheartbevo 90571]

21 minutes ago, Captainant said:

That doesn't matter. He was fired for holding a 1A protected political belief.

Which is the irony.  If his affair had been used as a (rightful) justification, we wouldn't be discussing the political angle.

 

[Brisketexan 106698]

34 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Which is the irony.  If his affair had been used as a (rightful) justification, we wouldn't be discussing the political angle.

 

But if the affair was the reason, then Trump couldn't crow about a political victory and punishing his enemies.  Which, of course, was the entire point of this whole exercise.

It's kind of like firing a minority who was late all the time, showed up drunk, and got in fights with his co-worker.  When asked why he fired him, the boss says loud and proud "cuz he was an uppity N*****!"  And.....you just lost the discrimination lawsuit.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11858]

I agree he should have been fired for his poor judgement and potentially compromising himself in regard to security.  That action has to be taken because not to do so cause a lot of problems within the agency.  The FBI should have been loud and clear about that being the sole reason for his dismissal.  

 

[XR4ticlone 122]

3 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't think that's a big point of contention.  The issue is Trumpkins' insistence that it renders the investigation meaningless, or at the very least, any evidence collected by Strzok should be inadmissible.  They just keep making shit up. 

IF I, as a conservative had such contempt for someone I was investigating for political reasons I'd like to think I'd dismiss myself from the investigation knowing that my clear and open bias would taint any findings when it went to trial.

That's just common sense 101.  

Oh...and right now they have no evidence that I'm aware of...unless you know of something directly linking Trump or the campaign to Russian collusion?

Manafort is on trial for tax evasion and being an unregistered lobbyist for a foreign agency. 

The Russians charged are not tied to Trump...just that they attempted to interfere in our elections.  Something that pretty much every nation does...including the US under Obama (Brexit & Israel elections).  

 

Regardless...someone stupid enough to do what Strzok did...much less as an FBI counterintelligence director is inexcusable.  He's clearly too fucking stupid to hold that position...in addition to being entirely too biased.  

[Chuckie Finster 22994]

20 minutes ago, XR4ticlone said:

IF I, as a conservative had such contempt for someone I was investigating for political reasons I'd like to think I'd dismiss myself from the investigation knowing that my clear and open bias would taint any findings when it went to trial.

hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[Biff Tannen 46077]

Ric Flair is the perfect avatar for that guy.  All of his posts are pretty much WOOOOOOO

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Right before the election, Rs were happily claiming that the NY office of the FBI was "Trumpland" and that agents would be leaking shit on Hillary to Giuliani and even pals at NYPD if Comey didn't recommend charges.   We discussed it extensively on the Shag at the time.   I don't recall a single R saying "if true, those agents should be fired."   Just the opposite — they were all hoping it would happen, and then happily credited the threat of leaks from Trump-supporting FBI agents with forcing Comey to go public the last week with the reopened investigation that probably flipped the election. 

Strzok acted improperly and was rightfully removed from the investigation, and should have had some punishment well short of firing.   Everything beyond that is more political bullshit from the hypocritical right. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 hour ago, Mojo Hand said:

Right before the election, Rs were happily claiming that the NY office of the FBI was "Trumpland" and that agents would be leaking shit on Hillary to Giuliani and even pals at NYPD if Comey didn't recommend charges.   We discussed it extensively on the Shag at the time.   I don't recall a single R saying "if true, those agents should be fired."   Just the opposite — they were all hoping it would happen, and then happily credited the threat of leaks from Trump-supporting FBI agents with forcing Comey to go public the last week with the reopened investigation that probably flipped the election. 

Strzok acted improperly and was rightfully removed from the investigation, and should have had some punishment well short of firing.   Everything beyond that is more political bullshit from the hypocritical right. 

as opposed as the pure as the driven snow democrats ? Did you seriously type hypocritical republicans and think yeah they're the only ones....

 

Scene:  A hot southwestern tarmac in mid 2016.

Characters: A big US Gov't owned jet.

                      Several secret service agents 

                     A sitting democrat attorney General.

                      An ex democrat president, and husband of the 2016 democrat nominee under investigation by the FBI.

Dialog:         Stories about golf and grandchildren

 

Stop me if you've heard this before........

[David Dennison 19444]

21 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

as opposed as the pure as the driven snow democrats ? Did you seriously type hypocritical republicans and think yeah they're the only ones....

 

Scene:  A hot R tarmac in mid 2016.

Characters: A big US Gov't owned jet.

                      Several secret service agents 

                     A sitting democrat attorney General.

                      An ex democrat president, and husband of the 2016 democrat nominee under investigation by the FBI.

Dialog:         Stories about golf and grandchildren

  

Stop me if you've heard this before........

Your party is scum. You know it. Don't try the false equivalences. They don't work.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

19 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Your party is scum. You know it. Don't try the false equivalences. They don't work.

No you're scum, let's just leave it that shall we.

[David Dennison 19444]

18 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

No you're scum, let's just leave it that shall we.

Awww, snowflake.

[shnsajax 3606]

2 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Which is the irony.  If his affair had been used as a (rightful) justification, we wouldn't be discussing the political angle.

 

If adultery was a legitimate issue we would have a different President right now. 

[Captainant 28421]

30 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

No you're scum, let's just leave it that shall we.

"NO PUPPET! YOURE THE PUPPET"

Taking after your orange idol, I see. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

25 minutes ago, Captainant said:

"NO PUPPET! YOURE THE PUPPET"

Taking after your orange idol, I see. 

The only orange idol I have is an orange crush but I'd pat him  on the back and say good job for beating  Hillary

Edited August 15, 2018 by Onboard 2.0

[jimmyjazz 46998]

41 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

No you're scum, let's just leave it that shall we.

See, you don't even try.  

[David Dennison 19444]

23 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

The only orange idol I have is an orange crush but I'd pat him  on the back and say good job for beating  Hillary

He's hurting your party badly. You don't seem to care. Probably because you know it's morally bankrupt anyway.

Edited August 15, 2018 by David Dennison

[jimmyjazz 46998]

19 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

He's hurting your party badly. You don't seem to care. Probably because you know it's morally bankrupt anyway.

This would presume morals.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 hour ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

as opposed as the pure as the driven snow democrats ? Did you seriously type hypocritical republicans and think yeah they're the only ones....

 

Scene:  A hot southwestern tarmac in mid 2016.

Characters: A big US Gov't owned jet.

                      Several secret service agents 

                     A sitting democrat attorney General.

                      An ex democrat president, and husband of the 2016 democrat nominee under investigation by the FBI.

Dialog:         Stories about golf and grandchildren

 

Stop me if you've heard this before........

Most predictable response ever.  Exhibit A for the type of Republican I'm talking about. 

[seven 1368]

No one self owns quite like Onboard 

[DanRydell 799]

Does the name Mark Fuhrman ring a bell?

What evidence gathered by Mark Fuhrman was ruled inadmissible due to his out-of-court statements?

[DanRydell 799]

This.  Any of us working in the private sector caught texting disparaging remarks about candidates on the short list for CEO to a coworker that they were having an affair with via their company phone would be out on their ass. Shit.  Pick one of the three and you might be out on your ass, but all three. Come on.  

The private sector isn’t burdened by the First Amendment.